Starting in second grade, students must be taught about diverse family types in a positive way and must accept that having families with children deprived of a married mother and father is a good thing. In fourth grade they must learn about the redefinition of marriage and therefore must accept that marriage has nothing to do with children and families; it is merely a lifestyle choice for adults. By high school the focus is on the right to create one's own sexual identity and how people have been doing that throughout history.

I am not sure which supposition is more idiotic; is it Christian nation or lifestyle choice? Apparently quality child rearing requires that they not be told that gay people actually do get married and they actually do raise children. That kid in their class who has two mommies or two daddies — he's just weird. In fact, LGBT people don't really exist at all. And it gets worse:

“The greatest concern is that the framework tends to normalize and reinforce things that have led to negative social and human consequences in society such as fatherlessness and children deprived of married mothers and fathers,” said William B. May for the Marriage Reality Movement.

May is a fundamentalist Catholic. He and his ilk have been telling us about consequences of marriage equality for more than 12 years now and those consequences never materialize. They filed brief after brief in the various courts and finally the Supreme Court. Their warnings were either hypothetical or theoretical. I cannot say that I have read them all but I have read a fair number of amicus briefs promoting marriage discrimination. Not one that I read has a sentence that starts with: “For example, in Massachusetts …” More importantly, the issue was settled about a year ago. The intellectual glory continues:

Curricula should be evaluated by how well it promotes men and women marrying before having children, discourages conceiving children with the intention of depriving them of the fundamental right of knowing, being loved by and being in relationship with their own mother, father or both, and helps children understand the value of true friendship that can lead to stable marriages and families rather than friendships based on sexual relationships that are presented as love.

Sorry Bill but curricula does not—and should not—conform to the teachings of the Catholic Church. Social Studies is about the real diverse country that we live in. About a third of the kids in any second grade class are either being raised by a single parent or have a step-parent. Some of the kids in that second grade class are being raised by a gay couple. When you denigrate the diverse family structures you denigrate the kids and that is unacceptable.

Behold the bigotry:

May emphasized, "It is not enough to oppose the agenda to provide our children with a corrupted understanding of love, sexuality, marriage and family that affects the choices they make in their own lives. We must provide a positive alternative to re-frame the dialogue."

The love of gay couples is not a corruption of anything. The love that those couples extend to their children is not a corrupted understanding of anything. Furthermore, understanding those relationships does not require a “positive alternative” because there is nothing negative about them requiring counterpoint. In all respects they are the equal of heterosexuals relationships (that notion would cause May's head to explode).

By fourth grade some children might begin to realize that their sexuality is different than their classmates. I want them to know that they could be the next Tim Cook, CEO of the largest company in the world. What we do not want to do is to expose them to people like Mr. May. We do not intentionally marginalize children. That's not how a civil society functions. We are not in the first century CE. Nor are we in the 13th century when the adored Thomas Aquinas asserted that natural law supported slavery.

One form of slavery exists today. It is characterized by a devotion to, and obsession with, ancient chronicles. It forms a contradiction of terms as voluntary slavery which makes no sense at all. Mr. May makes no sense at all. Mr. Stephenson makes no sense at all. California educators are on to these people. Their time of influence is done.